CrushAlot wrote:

awe1028 wrote:Fizdale has a lot of problems as a coach but chief among them is his refusal to commit fully to the young core. I have no problem with firing Fiz but unless the new coach commits fully the kids what's the point.

If the Knicks do pull the trigger and fire Fiz a coach that's interesting is Mike Miller. He has had much success in Westchester so he can coach (at least at the G League level). The other important point is that coaching in the G league has given him experience playing and developing young players. So playing and developing the young core with the knicks would not be foreign to him.

The willingness to play and develop young players should be high on the list when choosing the next coach and Miller would seem to fit the bill.

I heard a podcast with Isseman where he said he thought Miller would be the guy chosen if Fiz is let go. He said Miller is well liked by everyone in the front office.
If Fiz is let go and the team continues to play Randle the way he has played on offense then the problem is with the front office. I am still shocked that Fiz played Knox at the 2 against a team that plays small and shoots a ton of threes. It is getting harder to defend him.

Yeah, Knox is a tweener....He doesn't have a position. Too slow at SF.....Too soft at PF. But using him at SG? wow I agree....It's getting harder and harder to support this guy. The good news is Knox should be able to play 3 positions, once he reaches his peak. Yeah, Fitz was graded on his development. But once we added all these veteran forwards, I said this in the off season. The FO has set up Fitz to fail.

As a safety net, the front office signed these guys to 1 year deals so that when we fall out of the playoff race, they can have a fire sale at the trade deadline. The problem with this philosophy is it places the coach in a tough position because not only does he have to manage guys on 1 year deals who are looking for their next big pay day and long term deal, but some of these parts that dont mesh well.

On top of that, he is charged with developing the yutes as Mr. Earl would say. Regardless of how we arrived at this point, Frank is playing better now than he has an any point in his career. People complained that Fiz played Knox too many minutes last year and that hurt his development. This year, he's playing less minutes, and Knox has still looked the same: inconsistent from 3, still takes the ball to the basket like a 6'1 guard, twists and contorts his body trying to avoid contact against defenders who is the same size as him, poor defender, etc. Is it Fiz fault that he aint developing fast enough? Maybe Knox is who we thought he was coming out of Kentucky? If you take a look at the players who were available when we drafted Knox, both Bridges' aint doing much better. Clearly, we blew it on Alexander, though.

With that said, it would be foolish, in my opinion to fire Fiz at this point. Last year was a wash, and we are only 17 games into the season. If the Front office fires Fiz, it will place the target square on the their backs and that wouldn't be wise fro them. If we are rebuilding, why the urgency to fire the coach? The Hawks have better young talent than we do, and pretty much the same record, but there isn't even a whisper that Pierce should be fired. The reason being, they are rebuilding in a recognizable way. All the young talent is getting the majority of the minutes, and the vets, Parker and Turner are coming off the bench. Optically, people see Morris, Randle and Peyton in the starting lineup and think automatically that we should be a playoff contender. Thats the mistake. Thats on the front office for trying to catch lightning in a bottle and, as I said earlier, give the illusion to future free agents that we are more further along than we really are.

Let the season play out and reevaluate Fiz in June....

Uptown wrote:This roster was thrown together, in my opinion, to compete for the 8th seed and create the illusion that this franchise is trending in the right direction in terms of winning. I think Durant's statement that he chose the nyets over the Knicks (which is BS, he followed Kyrie) because they were further along in their development triggered this way of thinking by the front office.

As a safety net, the front office signed these guys to 1 year deals so that when we fall out of the playoff race, they can have a fire sale at the trade deadline. The problem with this philosophy is it places the coach in a tough position because not only does he have to manage guys on 1 year deals who are looking for their next big pay day and long term deal, but some of these parts that dont mesh well.

On top of that, he is charged with developing the yutes as Mr. Earl would say. Regardless of how we arrived at this point, Frank is playing better now than he has an any point in his career. People complained that Fiz played Knox too many minutes last year and that hurt his development. This year, he's playing less minutes, and Knox has still looked the same: inconsistent from 3, still takes the ball to the basket like a 6'1 guard, twists and contorts his body trying to avoid contact against defenders who is the same size as him, poor defender, etc. Is it Fiz fault that he aint developing fast enough? Maybe Knox is who we thought he was coming out of Kentucky? If you take a look at the players who were available when we drafted Knox, both Bridges' aint doing much better. Clearly, we blew it on Alexander, though.

With that said, it would be foolish, in my opinion to fire Fiz at this point. Last year was a wash, and we are only 17 games into the season. If the Front office fires Fiz, it will place the target square on the their backs and that wouldn't be wise fro them. If we are rebuilding, why the urgency to fire the coach? The Hawks have better young talent than we do, and pretty much the same record, but there isn't even a whisper that Pierce should be fired. The reason being, they are rebuilding in a recognizable way. All the young talent is getting the majority of the minutes, and the vets, Parker and Turner are coming off the bench. Optically, people see Morris, Randle and Peyton in the starting lineup and think automatically that we should be a playoff contender. Thats the mistake. Thats on the front office for trying to catch lightning in a bottle and, as I said earlier, give the illusion to future free agents that we are more further along than we really are.

Let the season play out and reevaluate Fiz in June....

we are on pace to win 16 games, is that when we should reevaluate

Why are you waiting until june, so the F/O can get another yr and buy time.

We are spinning our wheels yr after yr with the worst record in the NBA under MILLs, and the same old rebuilding story..

The Front office can't recruit, can't make good trades, and are pretty average at drafting, and don't know how to develop.

Fizdale is good at what?

Frank isn't much better, neither is knox, mitch still with the stupid fouls and no outside jumper, trier is glued to the bench..what part of this are you enjoying

martin wrote:

awe1028 wrote:Fizdale has a lot of problems as a coach but chief among them is his refusal to commit fully to the young core. I have no problem with firing Fiz but unless the new coach commits fully the kids what's the point.

If the Knicks do pull the trigger and fire Fiz a coach that's interesting is Mike Miller. He has had much success in Westchester so he can coach (at least at the G League level). The other important point is that coaching in the G league has given him experience playing and developing young players. So playing and developing the young core with the knicks would not be foreign to him.

The willingness to play and develop young players should be high on the list when choosing the next coach and Miller would seem to fit the bill.

So what does Fully Commit to the kids mean to you? What would be different this year for Fiz to commit to the kids?

He also justifies sitting Mitch by saying he wants spacing with on the court. If he is interested in someone to space the floor why not start Dotson who has proven to be a capable shooter instead of sitting Mitch for Gibson.

Then There is Trier. While Trier is not ready to start due to his iso style of play he should be getting ample minutes as a sixth man off the bench type. For a team that has often struggled to put the ball in the basket a player like Trier who has shown he is capable of getting buckets in bunches should not be glued to the bench

Finally Frank. Fizdale had no intention of giving Frank a chance until the fans turned on him. Given how Fiz has jerked Frank around in the past I am still not fully convinced he is committed to Frank as the starter. I know this is unfair to Fiz since Frank is starting now but I can't help but think that when Payton returns he will relegate Frank to the Bench. Again I admit this is probably unfair to say since there is no way of knowing if I am right until Payton returns.

awe1028 wrote:

martin wrote:

awe1028 wrote:Fizdale has a lot of problems as a coach but chief among them is his refusal to commit fully to the young core. I have no problem with firing Fiz but unless the new coach commits fully the kids what's the point.

If the Knicks do pull the trigger and fire Fiz a coach that's interesting is Mike Miller. He has had much success in Westchester so he can coach (at least at the G League level). The other important point is that coaching in the G league has given him experience playing and developing young players. So playing and developing the young core with the knicks would not be foreign to him.

The willingness to play and develop young players should be high on the list when choosing the next coach and Miller would seem to fit the bill.

So what does Fully Commit to the kids mean to you? What would be different this year for Fiz to commit to the kids?

Well for one Mitch should be starting. A 34 year old Taj Gibson should not be starting over him.
Yes Mitch fouls a lot but if Fiz continues to start Randle even though he turns the ball over at a prodigious rate himself and bogs down the offense with his iso play he can start Mitch. Let Mitch play through the fouls He is a young player this is the way he will improve in that area.

He also justifies sitting Mitch by saying he wants spacing with on the court. If he is interested in someone to space the floor why not start Dotson who has proven to be a capable shooter instead of sitting Mitch for Gibson.

Then There is Trier. While Trier is not ready to start due to his iso style of play he should be getting ample minutes as a sixth man off the bench type. For a team that has often struggled to put the ball in the basket a player like Trier who has shown he is capable of getting buckets in bunches should not be glued to the bench

Finally Frank. Fizdale had no intention of giving Frank a chance until the fans turned on him. Given how Fiz has jerked Frank around in the past I am still not fully convinced he is committed to Frank as the starter. I know this is unfair to Fiz since Frank is starting now but I can't help but think that when Payton returns he will relegate Frank to the Bench. Again I admit this is probably unfair to say since there is no way of knowing if I am right until Payton returns.

and how about how Fizdale didn't want to start Payton until after the first game where Payton came out of nowhere to nearly win that game.

I think I'd charge Fizdale with questionable talent evaluation skills.

I do not mind having Mitch off the bench, as long as he is getting minutes - but on all the other parts, right on!

Fire Fizdale!!!

In any case, I voted no on firing. We should give him the whole season and if we win less than 20 games (unless they trade away half the team), then you fire him and probably Mills at the end of the season. I am mixed on Perry because I think he might be a decent GM and the Mills influence might be the bigger problem.

Tank for Ball!

awe1028 wrote:

martin wrote:

awe1028 wrote:Fizdale has a lot of problems as a coach but chief among them is his refusal to commit fully to the young core. I have no problem with firing Fiz but unless the new coach commits fully the kids what's the point.

If the Knicks do pull the trigger and fire Fiz a coach that's interesting is Mike Miller. He has had much success in Westchester so he can coach (at least at the G League level). The other important point is that coaching in the G league has given him experience playing and developing young players. So playing and developing the young core with the knicks would not be foreign to him.

The willingness to play and develop young players should be high on the list when choosing the next coach and Miller would seem to fit the bill.

So what does Fully Commit to the kids mean to you? What would be different this year for Fiz to commit to the kids?

Well for one Mitch should be starting. A 34 year old Taj Gibson should not be starting over him.
Yes Mitch fouls a lot but if Fiz continues to start Randle even though he turns the ball over at a prodigious rate himself and bogs down the offense with his iso play he can start Mitch. Let Mitch play through the fouls He is a young player this is the way he will improve in that area.

He also justifies sitting Mitch by saying he wants spacing with on the court. If he is interested in someone to space the floor why not start Dotson who has proven to be a capable shooter instead of sitting Mitch for Gibson.

Then There is Trier. While Trier is not ready to start due to his iso style of play he should be getting ample minutes as a sixth man off the bench type. For a team that has often struggled to put the ball in the basket a player like Trier who has shown he is capable of getting buckets in bunches should not be glued to the bench

Finally Frank. Fizdale had no intention of giving Frank a chance until the fans turned on him. Given how Fiz has jerked Frank around in the past I am still not fully convinced he is committed to Frank as the starter. I know this is unfair to Fiz since Frank is starting now but I can't help but think that when Payton returns he will relegate Frank to the Bench. Again I admit this is probably unfair to say since there is no way of knowing if I am right until Payton returns.

You didn't really suggest anything different than is already happening. Mitch is not starting but he is getting as many minutes as his fouls allows and the team has a better rotation when he comes off bench. Mitch needs to earn that starting position and he hasn't.

Can't suggest giving Trier or Dot minutes without taking away some from RJ, plus both of those guys haven't really earned it. Same for Knox.